4 ms·

Your example is anecdotal and does not present the whole picture.

lmeyerov 2y ago
Same but different. I've been watching someone close to me have all their direct collaborators & senior mentors in cancer research across the top national labs (NIH, the top VAs, etc) be systematically fired and/or defunded. Pure R&D cancer researchers are typically on 'annually renewing contracts': think tenure-level principal investigators, not just lab techs/coordinators/programmers. They are all, by default, fired. The remaining senior cancer researchers with partial clinical duties might stay due to clinical duty exclusions, but they are still closing their cancer R&D lab portion because they have to fire all their staff specialists, cannot pay people, and cannot hire replacements. Each PI is basically a small business that got pieced together over years, so reestablishing them and their R&D programs performed by all their staff means many man-years of cancer research going down the tubes. The fraud, waste, and inefficiency is from the people lying about this. It is pretty 1984. When they fired "powerpoint people", that meant clinical trial coordinators who, as part of coordinating cancer trials, need to convey information. They gutted teams running active cancer drug trials with sick people getting cancer drugs through them. "Oops." (And no, the "mistakes" have not been corrected".) Even when cancer research staff is externally funded by non-government sources, they're still being fired. The university hospital + R&D side is a mess as well due to frozen funds, retroactive grant cancellations, well-performing grants not being renewed, review committees not looking at new grants, and even the program directors overseeing it all being fired. Imagine if you are a small business and your customers are not allowed to pay you - how would you plan your next 12 months? The result has been a slower version of the same thing. Universities and lab heads are firing trained staff and gutting future generations of new faculty & grad students. You can see this in the hiring freezes & job offer retractions, and less obvious, when openings are more about reshuffling internal staff. The people who are less impacted are researchers essentially bought out by big pharmaceuticals to run their trials, those not performing cancer research, etc. Different people. People aren't saying things because, until they're officially fired, federal law prohibits it. Even if they want to, they are busy trying to get their cancer research staff not fired, and do not want to put targets on the backs of people relying on them. Anyways, next time you see or write nonsense like this, please remember you are being lied to about basic things like cancer research and medical care. By supporting them, you are likewise promoting harmful lies about cancer research and medical care.
monero-xmr 2y ago
No, your description of doomer destruction is non-factual. She works in the blue state, Ivy-league affiliated research hospital that is supposedly on the chopping block. We are not observing child cancer funding being eliminated even in the lion's den of leftism
- epistasis 2y ago
  > even in the lion's den of leftism Interesting choice of words but it throws all the rest of your assessment into doubt. Especially your idea that your wife's research is worthy and then all the rest is less worthy.
  - monero-xmr 2y ago
    I think the academy is long overdue for a reckoning. The Assistants to the Assistant Vice Deans, the absurd grants in the soft sciences, the absurd increases in undergraduate tuition for degrees that make absolutely no sense. The golden age of the academy is ending, and to pretend there is nothing to cut or make more efficient can only be the opinion of someone whose bread is buttered by the existing system
    - mu53 2y ago
      no biases detected
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - disgruntledphd2 2y ago
      > The Assistants to the Assistant Vice Deans, the absurd grants in the soft sciences, the absurd increases in undergraduate tuition for degrees that make absolutely no sense. None of this is related to research funding. Indeed, reducing spend on this could increase money available for research. Fundamentally, the US has done well by investing in research (and by being a native English country), but it appears that's not something that the current government wants to continue. And that's totally fine as a democratic decision, but don't pretend that this won't have economic consequences down the line.

Same but different. I've been watching someone close to me have all their direct collaborators & senior mentors in cancer research across the top national labs (NIH, the top VAs, etc) be systematically fired and/or defunded. Pure R&D cancer researchers are typically on 'annually renewing contracts': think tenure-level principal investigators, not just lab techs/coordinators/programmers. They are all, by default, fired. The remaining senior cancer researchers with partial clinical duties might stay due to clinical duty exclusions, but they are still closing their cancer R&D lab portion because they have to fire all their staff specialists, cannot pay people, and cannot hire replacements. Each PI is basically a small business that got pieced together over years, so reestablishing them and their R&D programs performed by all their staff means many man-years of cancer research going down the tubes. The fraud, waste, and inefficiency is from the people lying about this. It is pretty 1984. When they fired "powerpoint people", that meant clinical trial coordinators who, as part of coordinating cancer trials, need to convey information. They gutted teams running active cancer drug trials with sick people getting cancer drugs through them. "Oops." (And no, the "mistakes" have not been corrected".) Even when cancer research staff is externally funded by non-government sources, they're still being fired. The university hospital + R&D side is a mess as well due to frozen funds, retroactive grant cancellations, well-performing grants not being renewed, review committees not looking at new grants, and even the program directors overseeing it all being fired. Imagine if you are a small business and your customers are not allowed to pay you - how would you plan your next 12 months? The result has been a slower version of the same thing. Universities and lab heads are firing trained staff and gutting future generations of new faculty & grad students. You can see this in the hiring freezes & job offer retractions, and less obvious, when openings are more about reshuffling internal staff. The people who are less impacted are researchers essentially bought out by big pharmaceuticals to run their trials, those not performing cancer research, etc. Different people. People aren't saying things because, until they're officially fired, federal law prohibits it. Even if they want to, they are busy trying to get their cancer research staff not fired, and do not want to put targets on the backs of people relying on them. Anyways, next time you see or write nonsense like this, please remember you are being lied to about basic things like cancer research and medical care. By supporting them, you are likewise promoting harmful lies about cancer research and medical care.

monero-xmr 2y ago

No, your description of doomer destruction is non-factual. She works in the blue state, Ivy-league affiliated research hospital that is supposedly on the chopping block. We are not observing child cancer funding being eliminated even in the lion's den of leftism

epistasis 2y ago
> even in the lion's den of leftism Interesting choice of words but it throws all the rest of your assessment into doubt. Especially your idea that your wife's research is worthy and then all the rest is less worthy.
- monero-xmr 2y ago
  I think the academy is long overdue for a reckoning. The Assistants to the Assistant Vice Deans, the absurd grants in the soft sciences, the absurd increases in undergraduate tuition for degrees that make absolutely no sense. The golden age of the academy is ending, and to pretend there is nothing to cut or make more efficient can only be the opinion of someone whose bread is buttered by the existing system
  - mu53 2y ago
    no biases detected
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - disgruntledphd2 2y ago
    > The Assistants to the Assistant Vice Deans, the absurd grants in the soft sciences, the absurd increases in undergraduate tuition for degrees that make absolutely no sense. None of this is related to research funding. Indeed, reducing spend on this could increase money available for research. Fundamentally, the US has done well by investing in research (and by being a native English country), but it appears that's not something that the current government wants to continue. And that's totally fine as a democratic decision, but don't pretend that this won't have economic consequences down the line.